Goaltending

[jjgallow]

I know you are just thinking down the road, but if he's a drafted player from another team are you suggesting we trade for him now?

A bit risky for an unsigned Russian in the KHL.

 

It all depends on the price, of course.   But risk can be good.  Risk can make players of exceptionally high calibre, affordable.

 

The greatest risk is with NYI, imho, because they have nowhere for him really other than the KHL.    And the KHL will do everything they can to keep him.

 

The Flames, on the other hand, can make room for him.   In the AHL, or NHL, as needed.     So he has more value to the Flames, and lower risk, than he has with NYI.   Which created the potential, theoretically, for acquiring him for less than what his value is to the Flames.

 

You are correct that I am looking down the road more, and thus not in alignment with everyone here.   But I'm not Entirely looking down the road.    Could a player of his calibre conceivably have an Immediate impact as a starter in the NHL?

 

The answer is absolutely yes.    (if he bought out his contract).

 

Is it the lowest risk short term solution?  No.    I just don't personally care.   But the potential is there to meet both short term and long term objectives.

[travel_dude]

It all depends on the price, of course.   But risk can be good.  Risk can make players of exceptionally high calibre, affordable.

 

The greatest risk is with NYI, imho, because they have nowhere for him really other than the KHL.    And the KHL will do everything they can to keep him.

 

The Flames, on the other hand, can make room for him.   In the AHL, or NHL, as needed.     So he has more value to the Flames, and lower risk, than he has with NYI.   Which created the potential, theoretically, for acquiring him for less than what his value is to the Flames.

 

You are correct that I am looking down the road more, and thus not in alignment with everyone here.   But I'm not Entirely looking down the road.    Could a player of his calibre conceivably have an Immediate impact as a starter in the NHL?

 

The answer is absolutely yes.    (if he bought out his contract).

 

Is it the lowest risk short term solution?  No.    I just don't personally care.   But the potential is there to meet both short term and long term objectives.

 

That's all well and good, but you stated before that the Flames development system for goalies sucked.  I doubt he would be ready this year for the NHL, so he would have to go to the AHL.

 

Assuming you could land him, you would need to pay him what he is making in the KHL or wait till the 2018/19 season.  By that point Gillies could be the NHL starter here, or just ready to be one.

[jjgallow]

That's all well and good, but you stated before that the Flames development system for goalies sucked.  I doubt he would be ready this year for the NHL, so he would have to go to the AHL.

 

Assuming you could land him, you would need to pay him what he is making in the KHL or wait till the 2018/19 season.  By that point Gillies could be the NHL starter here, or just ready to be one.

 

AHL development is what it is

 

Maybe there is another option (not sure on international agreements).   I'm not expecting everyone to agree with it, because it again relies on younger goalies next year.

 

but:

 

• Acquire his rights (maybe after some kind of assurance or communication).  Leave him in the KHL.
• Play Ortio and a stopgap in he NHL (ie., Ramo, etc)
• Play Gillies in the AHL

 

-First 20 games in the season:   Either Ortio or Ramo dissapoints (safe bet).  Hopefully one earns their keep.    Let the other go.

 

 

At this point, a low cost vacancy has been created in the system.   Buy out Ilya's KHL contract at this point (depending on his play).

 

Now, depending on current performance:       Bring Gillies up and give him his shot (put Ilya into the AHL),

                                                                        OR:

                                                                       Bring Ilya straight into the NHL (after a short AHL conditioning stint)

 

 

 

p.s....  A strategy like this possibly wastes 1-2 million in buyouts etc, but not necessarily on CAP space, and is still WAY cheaper than bringing in a high-priced vet who is ALSO a risk.

 

          Basically the hope is that one of Gillies, Ortio, or Ilya Will take that next step.    

                                                       If all else fails, maybe Ramo has a comeback.

                             Odds are, imho, NOT as bad as viewed here.

 

                            Worst case scenario....you have to do it all over again and bring in a 5th goalie.   But even then, at least you KNOW what you have for the future.  The sooner we know what we have in Gillies, even Ortio, etc....the sooner we can make better long term decisions.

[travel_dude]

AHL development is what it is

 

Maybe there is another option (not sure on international agreements).   I'm not expecting everyone to agree with it, because it again relies on younger goalies next year.

 

but:

 

• Acquire his rights (maybe after some kind of assurance or communication).  Leave him in the KHL.
• Play Ortio and a stopgap in he NHL (ie., Ramo, etc)
• Play Gillies in the AHL

 

-First 20 games in the season:   Either Ortio or Ramo dissapoints (safe bet).  Hopefully one earns their keep.    Let the other go.

 

 

At this point, a low cost vacancy has been created in the system.   Buy out Ilya's KHL contract at this point (depending on his play).

 

Now, depending on current performance:       Bring Gillies up and give him his shot (put Ilya into the AHL),

                                                                        OR:

                                                                       Bring Ilya straight into the NHL (after a short AHL conditioning stint)

 

Ramo/Ortio would be a mistake.  If either craps the bed, we can't bring in Gillies.  That would be the worst possible development of a player possible.  So would bringing a goalie right out of the KHL into the NHL. As well we are stuck with Ramo's or Ortio's contract. 

 

The big problem I have with your solution isn't with obtaining the KHL goalie; it's that Ramo/Ortio is just a continuation of the bad goaltending we had last season.  You instill zero confidence in your team in front.  They will play scared.  Maybe Ortio can come out of the gate on fire, but that's not what we've seen in the past.

 

If Ortio gets a bunch of starts in October, I think you see a win one/lose one streak.  That's what he did at the end of the season when he was at his best.  7-7-4 over the final 18 games.

[cross16]

Unfortunately that wouldn't work. As of right now the NHL as agreed with all international leagues to honor contracts and not pursue buyouts. That is why the international community wants, but as of right now the NHL has resisted and instead has insisted on leagues just honouring contracts.

 

the other issue with that is once you play a game overseas during an NHL season you are subject to waivers if you want to join the NHL that season. So very likely you would be wasting your time/assets because Sorokin would get claimed for sure. 

 

Its all irrelevant because I don't think the Islanders are letting him go, not till they at least get a chance to see what they have. I do not view him as attainable. 

 

The Flames long term future right now is between Gilles/Macdonald. I really don't see the value in bringing in another option to compete with those two. I see the value in undrafted free agents or draft picks whose rights you could hold/slide for 2 years before their contracts count but right now I don't see the value in spending assets in trades to acquire someone to compete with those two. To get a realistic option for compete with Gilles/Macdonald is going to be expensive so why not just spend the assets on someone who can help you now AND in the future. 

[jjgallow]

Ramo/Ortio would be a mistake.  If either craps the bed, we can't bring in Gillies.  

 

Oh, it wouldn't be with the intention of them both doing well.  It would be Designed with the assumption that One of them Will crap the bed.   I'm talking about signing them both to league minimums.  And if Ramo says no, see ya.  We find someone else possibly better, at league minimum.

 

Basically, once the bed-crapping occurs, one gets either sent down (or bought out), and Gillies comes up (Or Ilya, etc).   Basically you're sacrificing one league-minimum salary.  Which, is still a  LOT cheaper, than over-paying for an established veteran, that kills your cap and costs several million.  (with what I would personally consider to be somewhat similar risk profiles)

Unfortunately that wouldn't work. As of right now the NHL as agreed with all international leagues to honor contracts and not pursue buyouts. That is why the international community wants, but as of right now the NHL has resisted and instead has insisted on leagues just honouring contracts.

 

ok....so then...how does it work?   the player his to buy themselves out with their own money, is that right?

 

How the heck is that regulated I wonder...

[travel_dude]

Oh, it wouldn't be with the intention of them both doing well.  It would be Designed with the assumption that One of them Will crap the bed.   I'm talking about signing them both to league minimums.  And if Ramo says no, see ya.  We find someone else possibly better, at league minimum.

 

Basically, once the bed-crapping occurs, one gets either sent down (or bought out), and Gillies comes up (Or Ilya, etc).   Basically you're sacrificing one league-minimum salary.  Which, is still a  LOT cheaper, than over-paying for an established veteran, that kills your cap and costs several million.  (with what I would personally consider to be somewhat similar risk profiles)

 

ok....so then...how does it work?   the player his to buy themselves out with their own money, is that right?

 

How the heck is that regulated I wonder...

 

Sign two goalies with the intent of failing?  Um, ok.  And you can't buy them out until the end of the season.  Stuck with a contract against your 50.

 

If it happened quickly, then Gillies would have about 20 games of AHL experience before going to the NHL.  I think that is the exact opposite of the way Murray was developed. 

[robrob1974]

Sign two goalies with the intent of failing? Um, ok. And you can't buy them out until the end of the season. Stuck with a contract against your 50.

If it happened quickly, then Gillies would have about 20 games of AHL experience before going to the NHL. I think that is the exact opposite of the way Murray was developed.

I think JJ is referring to the KHL goalie he is interested in, wanting him to buyout of his contract so he can come to the NHL.

[jjgallow]

I think JJ is referring to the KHL goalie he is interested in, wanting him to buyout of his contract so he can come to the NHL.

 

I am, yes.    Although cross has something to say about that (yet it still happens, so...confusing).

 

I'm also not talking about an intent to fail.  I'm talking about reality.   The reality that despite best intentions, it's unlikely both will succeed.   (as we saw this year, for instance).   As long as One of them succeeds, the strategy is a huge success imho.

 

travel_dude is also Somewhat correct that my proposed strategy could also involve "buying" one of Ramo or Ortio out, but that's not Really what I mean.   More likely, Ramo is signed to a league-minimum two-way contract (and if he balks, there's a million just like him in line).     

 

If Ramo craps out, he'd likely get sent down to the AHL.     If Ortio gets to that point, he'd probably be waivered to the AHL.   So, I wouldn't say that travel_dude's assessment is wrong entirely....but maybe just missing the point imho.   Agree with it or not, it is Entirely possible and allowable, and the 50 contract rule is Not nearly as important as getting some extra insurance in net for the long and short term.

 

I think the debate on that proposal should be more about having 3 young goalies in play (Ortio, Gillies, Ilya etc), not to mention MacDonald, Schneider, and one wildcard league-minimum vet (ie., Ramo).    The mechanics of it work out, it goes back to the question of that's best for near term, long term success, and development.

If it happened quickly, then Gillies would have about 20 games of AHL experience before going to the NHL.  I think that is the exact opposite of the way Murray was developed. 

 

Your first sentence I addressed above.    

 

On Gillies....yeah.   It sucks he missed that year.  Big time.  And, honestly, that's the whole idea with having an insurance piece like Ilya.   Had Gillies a full AHL season under his belt, we might not even Have goaltender worries right now.   But he doesn't.  Point taken.

 

Age-wise, he's good to go.   Experience-wise, US College Hockey did a lot for him.     Yeah, you ideally want more AHL games.   But, back to like I say.....we're not great at developing goalies in the AHL anyway.  So if he's lights out for 20 games in the AHL....and there's an opening....  I would.

[travel_dude]

I am, yes.    Although cross has something to say about that (yet it still happens, so...confusing).

 

I'm also not talking about an intent to fail.  I'm talking about reality.   The reality that despite best intentions, it's unlikely both will succeed.   (as we saw this year, for instance).   As long as One of them succeeds, the strategy is a huge success imho.

 

travel_dude is also Somewhat correct that my proposed strategy could also involve "buying" one of Ramo or Ortio out, but that's not Really what I mean.   More likely, Ramo is signed to a league-minimum two-way contract (and if he balks, there's a million just like him in line).     

 

If Ramo craps out, he'd likely get sent down to the AHL.     If Ortio gets to that point, he'd probably be waivered to the AHL.   So, I wouldn't say that travel_dude's assessment is wrong entirely....but maybe just missing the point imho.   Agree with it or not, it is Entirely possible and allowable, and the 50 contract rule is Not nearly as important as getting some extra insurance in net for the long and short term.

 

I think the debate on that proposal should be more about having 3 young goalies in play (Ortio, Gillies, Ilya etc), not to mention MacDonald, Schneider, and one wildcard league-minimum vet (ie., Ramo).    The mechanics of it work out, it goes back to the question of that's best for near term, long term success, and development.

 

Your first sentence I addressed above.    

 

On Gillies....yeah.   It sucks he missed that year.  Big time.  And, honestly, that's the whole idea with having an insurance piece like Ilya.   Had Gillies a full AHL season under his belt, we might not even Have goaltender worries right now.   But he doesn't.  Point taken.

 

Age-wise, he's good to go.   Experience-wise, US College Hockey did a lot for him.     Yeah, you ideally want more AHL games.   But, back to like I say.....we're not great at developing goalies in the AHL anyway.  So if he's lights out for 20 games in the AHL....and there's an opening....  I would.

 

Thanks for the wall of text.

 

Gillies didn't exactly have a lot of college experience.  Three years.  Not saying he couldn't be all that and then some....

 

But.

 

There are a couple of ways to ruin a goalie.  One is putting them in a position to fail.  If Ortio or Ramo crapped the bed, you have to hope that Gillies is lights out in the AHL.  If not, are you really going to call him up?  If you don't, then we are exactly the way we are as last year.  If you do, then he could lose any confidence he ever had.

 

Realistically, BT is going to get a NHL starter and sign a backup.  No more than one will be from last season's mix.  Possibly neither, though Ortio is a cheap option.  Give him every 3rd game and see if he can win more than 1/2.  If not, then go and get a backup.

Any other goalie options are prospects.

[cross16]

ok....so then...how does it work? the player his to buy themselves out with their own money, is that right?

How the heck is that regulated I wonder...

Sure it may be an unregulated system but again even if you could buy him out your have to get him through waivers and you wouldn't. Your plan only works in the offseason you can't bring a player over midsession without exposing him to waivers.

Like I said thought its not going to happen. I don't think the isles move him and Sorokin has already made it very public he is committed to CSKA for the remainder of his contract at least.

[kehatch]

Gilles could very well be ready as soon as this season. But you don't bank on that.

Pittsburgh showed the right way to develop a goalie. Murray split games with veteran support in the AHL for a year. When he dominated the AHL he was elevated to the starter position (again in the AHL).

When he continued to dominate he was given an opportunity in the NHL playing backup to Fleury. He continued to dominate so when Fleury was hurt Murray got the starts. When Flurry returned Murray remained the better goalie so he has kept the net.

Pittsburgh never made space for him. They didn't clear the roster of veterans for him. They never invested blind faith in him. They started him at the bottom of a veteran depth chart and made him work his way up. When he dominated they gave him a bit more opportunity. When he dominated again they gave him more.

In Calgary you have Ortio who has failed to dominate at any level and Gilles who has 7 games of pro. It would be a terrible development decision to surround these guys with unproven youth or crappy veterans. I don't think you could find a more surefire way to derail the development of these goalies or the rebuild in general.

The Flames NEED a stable goalie for the NHL team. If that means they need to pony up some cap and assets then that is what they need to do. If expansion happens there will be zero reason not to take advantage.

[jjgallow]

Thanks for the wall of text.

 

Gillies didn't exactly have a lot of college experience.  

 

Ok....so....looks like we need to take a break then?   You're starting to get irritated, and say things that ....make no sense.   And there's no need, it's the off-season lol.

Sure it may be an unregulated system but again even if you could buy him out your have to get him through waivers and you wouldn't. Your plan only works in the offseason you can't bring a player over midsession without exposing him to waivers.

 

What????   I'd never heard of that.   Geez.  Wait.....Are we talking about KHL to AHL?   Or KHL to NHL?  Or both???

[jjgallow]

Gilles could very well be ready as soon as this season. But you don't bank on that.

.......

The Flames NEED a stable goalie for the NHL team. If that means they need to pony up some cap and assets then that is what they need to do. If expansion happens there will be zero reason not to take advantage.

 

Agreed on Gillies.  Just....my mitigation to that is more youth, and better long term chances.   We don't agree on the priorities but I think we generally agree on the risks at this point.   I'd be willing to take bigger risks next season.   I disagree that a stable goalie is a NEED, specifically for the next year.   That doesn't mean I want them to tank.  I'd just be willing to take more risk now, in return for less risk later.   I would say that a top 5 or top 10 NHL goalie is a NEED within their window as a contender.

[jjgallow]

Pittsburgh showed the right way to develop a goalie. Murray split games with veteran support in the AHL for a year. When he dominated the AHL he was elevated to the starter position (again in the AHL).

 

Just wanted to say, I agree with this too.   But it's not something I've seen the Flames do well.  Murray arguably stunk the joint up for the first half of his first AHL season.

http://theahl.com/stats/gamebygame.php?seasonId=48&id=4891

 

A very similar performance from Ortio, at the same age, in 2011-2012, got him booted from the AHL in just 9 games.  His first experience in NA as well.    And there's a lot more examples of that than just Ortio.

 

Anyway, just wanted to mention that it's a fine line.   Just as much as it's about holding them back, it's also about having faith in them.   Faith, and patience.

[kehatch]

Just wanted to say, I agree with this too.   But it's not something I've seen the Flames do well.  Murray arguably stunk the joint up for the first half of his first AHL season.

http://theahl.com/stats/gamebygame.php?seasonId=48&id=4891

 

A very similar performance from Ortio, at the same age, in 2011-2012, got him booted from the AHL in just 9 games.  His first experience in NA as well.    And there's a lot more examples of that than just Ortio.

 

Anyway, just wanted to mention that it's a fine line.   Just as much as it's about holding them back, it's also about having faith in them.   Faith, and patience.

 

I agree that the Flames need to be more patient developing goalies.  I don't have a big issue with returning Ortio to Finland the first time because I think it was a legitimate development option.  But I was very vocal against Hartley's goalie rotation this season.  I have never been a fan of Ortio but even to me it felt like the Flames went out of their way to not play him early in the season.  

 

I just don't understand how you get from there to putting these guys with a bunch of unproven youth or crummy veterans.  That is the leap in logic that has some of us confused with your argument.  It isn't what the Penguins did with Murray. It isn't what Tampa did with Vasilevskiy.  The right thing to do is to put Ortio with a proven veteran in the NHL and Gilles with a good AHL goalie and then let their play dictate.  That is what most successful teams have done, including Tampa and Pittsburgh.  

 

That isn't my opinion because I am scared of risking standings results next season.  I think that is the right decision to correctly develop the goalies as well as the team in front of them.  The Flames are not going to ruin Gilles if he dominates the AHL next season.  They might if he is rushed to the NHL before he is ready or if he doesn't have support in the AHL.  I really don't understand how you see surrounding our young goalies with decent goalies is detrimental to their development.

[cross16]

What???? I'd never heard of that. Geez. Wait.....Are we talking about KHL to AHL? Or KHL to NHL? Or both???

Both. How the Islanders wound up with Nabokov and how the flames likely would have lost Ryan O'Reilly had the Avs not matched.

Maybe they clarified the rule because I know the flames were going to challenge but to the best of my knowledge they didn't.

[travel_dude]

Ok....so....looks like we need to take a break then?   You're starting to get irritated, and say things that ....make no sense.   And there's no need, it's the off-season lol.

 

What????   I'd never heard of that.   Geez.  Wait.....Are we talking about KHL to AHL?   Or KHL to NHL?  Or both???

 

Just the wall of text, guy.  

 

Three years in college playing on the weekends is not like playing three seasons in the AHL.  Not even close.  I think he will be a great goalie, but the lost year set him back; he needs at least one (better if two) seasons of solid AHL play.

[jjgallow]

Both. How the Islanders wound up with Nabokov and how the flames likely would have lost Ryan O'Reilly had the Avs not matched.

Maybe they clarified the rule because I know the flames were going to challenge but to the best of my knowledge they didn't.

 

ok, well...yeah....if you're right, let's not do O'Reilly again lol.

Just the wall of text, guy.  

 

Three years in college playing on the weekends is not like playing three seasons in the AHL.  Not even close.  I think he will be a great goalie, but the lost year set him back; he needs at least one (better if two) seasons of solid AHL play.

 

ok lol.

 

Disagree....and look no further than Gaudreau.    But I'm not saying he's NHL ready.  I'm just saying he's got the whole college thing under his belt and I don't think that's a very disputable fact.

[jjgallow]

  It isn't what the Penguins did with Murray. It isn't what Tampa did with Vasilevskiy.  

......

The Flames are not going to ruin Gilles if he dominates the AHL next season.  They might if he is rushed to the NHL before he is ready or if he doesn't have support in the AHL. 

 

 

I agree that Murray wasn't rushed....sort of.   He WAS rushed into the AHL, and, after a 4 month rough patch, he responded to the challenge and the patience paid off.

 

I don't agree on the Vasilevsky point.  I believe he was brought into the NHL quite early. 

 

Honestly they're both successes.   I won't argue with you that more time in the AHL is typically better.   But that also depends on your development system and ours is not necessarily superb.

 

And that...is why the Flames could ruin Gillies either way.  Because we Don't have a fantastic AHL program, imho.   Anyway, I agree with you to a point.   But the more high calibre goaltending prospects we have, the better.  And some of them, if not all, WILL get that Matt Murray development.  We can't assume that Gillies is our guy anyway.  Maybe it's MacDonald.  Maybe it's Schneider.   And...yeah...maybe it's Ortio (I'll give up on that after next season).  

[robrob1974]

Our AHL teams all around have been crap because of team play and goaltending. And drafting.

Goalies need confidence, sometimes it takes a team to help that, and sometimes the goalie gives the team confidence too.

[travel_dude]

ok, well...yeah....if you're right, let's not do O'Reilly again lol.

 

ok lol.

 

Disagree....and look no further than Gaudreau.    But I'm not saying he's NHL ready.  I'm just saying he's got the whole college thing under his belt and I don't think that's a very disputable fact.

 

No doubt a forward can develop faster than a goalie.  Johnny is an exception even to the typical college kid mold.  He was a NHL player in a bantam body.  I would prefer that we have a starter for the next few years and have Gillies come up and steal the job.  I doubt that Ortio has it in him.  He's not the prototypical New NHL goalie.  He'll get a chance this fall to prove that he is a NHL goalie.

 

I agree that we need to look in different places to find the next one.  Maybe the next one is the one that makes it over Gillies and MacDonald.  The good thing is that we have some good prospects.

[phoenix66]

I know the talk for MAF is ramping up and while I've come around on wanting him, I still don't think we can afford an almost 6 million goalie at this stage.

At the same time, I think we've seen the last of Joe Colborne unless a miracle happens and he signs for $1.75 or less.so I think his rights get traded at the draft.

What I think would be a good opportunity, is offer up Colbornes rights and a sweetener like a 2Nd rounder to Philly for Neuvirth. He has 1 year left at 1.6 and you'd still have money left to sign an Enroth as insurance.

Dunno would Philly part with him? Joe would look pretty good in Philly I believe

[travel_dude]

I know the talk for MAF is ramping up and while I've come around on wanting him, I still don't think we can afford an almost 6 million goalie at this stage.

At the same time, I think we've seen the last of Joe Colborne unless a miracle happens and he signs for $1.75 or less.so I think his rights get traded at the draft.

What I think would be a good opportunity, is offer up Colbornes rights and a sweetener like a 2Nd rounder to Philly for Neuvirth. He has 1 year left at 1.6 and you'd still have money left to sign an Enroth as insurance.

Dunno would Philly part with him? Joe would look pretty good in Philly I believe

 

Burke kind of let it be known that Colborne won't be getting a huge raise.  And let's face it, he would likely sign a short term deal for a discount to ensure he stays here.  

 

MAF would be my last choice of available goalies right now.

[phoenix66]

Burke kind of let it be known that Colborne won't be getting a huge raise.  And let's face it, he would likely sign a short term deal for a discount to ensure he stays here.  

 

MAF would be my last choice of available goalies right now.

Agreed he's not my first choice either.if we can keep Colborne under 2M I agree we sign Joe.im just not convinced he takes that much of a discount. If he goes to arbitration, we run the risk of being either stuck with a bad contract or walking away for nothing.

What do you think it would take to get Neuvirth out of Philly? I think he'd be a great target.